Sean Hannity

Sean Hannity

Sean Hannity was just partially satisfied with the Tea Party's debt deal victory this week, in which they managed to secure trillions in spending cuts and no tax increases, by "holding the president's feet to the fire" and threatening to let the global economy capsize (view clip). Triumphant as all this was, Hannity finds there is still something to be wished for – as he feels the spending cuts were not nearly deep enough and he fears that the bill did nothing to ensure that the rich get to keep their Bush tax cuts.

On the left, it is a different story as Democrats are outraged over the fact that the bill does not immediately trigger any new tax hikes on you, the American people. However, this is something that we are keeping a close eye on because it is the belief of many that the bill authorises a so-called special committee to repeal the Bush tax cuts and also possibly set into motion other so called revenue enhancers down the road.

Hannity is also dismayed that Republicans, who pride themselves on being security hawks, actually authorised some cuts in defence spending, and that entitlement programmes such as social security and Medicare (so called entitlements because Americans pay into these programmes their entire working lives and are therefore entitled to a payout when they retire) remain more or less intact.

He discussed his concerns with Congressman Paul Ryan, who confirmed that the Bush tax cuts are still on schedule to expire in 2013, explaining that the bill did not manage to change current tax law. Ryan was not happy with the level of spending cuts either (he had wanted $6.2tn and had to settle for $2.4tn), and he shares Hannity's disappointment that Medicare as we know it still exists. But he explained that the only way for Republicans to get the kind of reforms they want, which will enable the rich to hold on to their wealth and the poor and the elderly to learn the art of self-reliance, is to take back the Senate and the presidency in 2012. Hannity agreed but he was a little worried about how the Tea Party is being perceived.

It really aggravates me: the 2010 election, which was historic was because of the Tea Party … I think even the changes were a result of the Tea Party conservatives, the elected people they hired and they said do this job, right? So Congressman Mike Doyle of Pennsylvania actually said the following about this bill; and he said we have negotiated with "terrorists" – a small group of terrorists have made it impossible to spend any money.

Later on in the programme, regular guest Dick Morris reassured Hannity that it doesn't matter what anyone thinks, because the Tea Party is running the show now and the bill has "doomed Barack Obama" because his supporters on the left have turned against him.

Rush Limbaugh

Rush Limbaugh

Unlike Hannity, Rush Limbaugh is not convinced that the bill was a triumph for Republicans or that it will lead to the ousting of President Obama in 2012 (listen to clip). He has not been happy about the bill from the outset because it contains no new tax cuts and because he believes the $2.4tn spending cuts are negligible. He also fears that now that Republicans own the bill, they also own the economy, which is disastrous because he believes the economy is certain to get worse (because the cuts were not deep enough). So, he feels that Republicans have handed President Obama a perfect re-election strategy.

There's no question that that's what the narrative is, because the economy is not gonna improve, and they're gonna carry this illusion forward that there are all these massive budget cuts and cuts in government spending. He'll be able to say, "See? It hasn't helped. It hasn't done anything. The Republican way just doesn't work." It's all gonna depend. He's not gonna get away with that here, and he's not gonna get away with it (hopefully) with the Republican presidential nominee, but that's what the narrative is gonna be.

Limbaugh clarifies that he doesn't mean to imply that the bill was a "slam dunk victory" for the president, but he is in the game long enough to know that the American public may not be so gung-ho about the spending cuts, once they feel their impact – and this will make it that much harder on the rich to continue justifying their current tax cuts, never mind ensuring future tax cuts. He believes that the economy is going to be so weakened as a result of the spending cuts bill that only the rich will be left with any money and, therefore, will be forced to relinquish it.

Now, when the economy still falters, as it will, Obama's going to say during the campaign that he worked hard and that he sacrificed and that he compromised and he went along with all these budget cuts, and he went along with entitlement reform: it didn't work. The economy is still gonna be mired in recession. There will not be gazillions of new jobs being created. That's where Obama's Plan B surfaces. Raising taxes on everybody. Now, many of his constituents, of course, don't pay anything. But the Bush tax extensions for the rich are dead in the water. When the economy continues to tank, Obama will call for more skin in the game. He's gotta go where the rest of the money is. That's his point. He's gonna raise taxes on the only people who have any money left!

In addition to that depressing thought, Limbaugh is outraged that the first round of spending cuts are scheduled to occur around Thanksgiving and Christmas, as it will be embarrassing for Republicans to have to enact cuts that will leave the elderly and the poor hungry and without healthcare during the holidays.

Michael Savage

Michael Savage

Michael Savage shares Rush Limbaugh's bleak outlook on the prospects of the spending cuts bill ensuring that the rich keep their tax cuts (listen to clip). He believes that the American people have been hoodwinked once again and that "the Marxists got their way and beat Boehner to a paste", and now they are going to do what they have always wanted to do – "which is destroy America's ability to defend itself". Although the bill contains no tax increases, Savage seems to think that President Obama is a certified "Leninist", who can't "take wealth from the rich at gunpoint, as Lenin did in Russia, so he has to use taxation and regulation." Savage also believes that the entire debt ceiling debate was deliberately exploited by Obama's campaign adviser (David Axelrod) to define his re-election strategy.

This debate was all about him setting down the guidelines for that campaign and he [Axelrod] says this is the debate that he wants Obama to have and Obama's going to win it. Obama says we must tax the rich and that's the campaign theme upon which Obama is going to run. Now, the Republicans don't know what to do to defend themselves against that kind of claim, because you can't just say "no, don't tax the rich"; what you have to do is redefine the argument.

So Savage understands that the argument that he and other rich conservatives have been advancing for years – that the rich having tax cuts makes the rest of us better-off – is getting to be a harder sell now that so many Americans have lapsed into poverty. And his biggest fear is that Americans may actually start believing President Obama's counter-argument.

I can't look at him [President Obama] because he makes me ashamed to watch him, and the reason I can't watch him anymore is when I watch him and I get angry, is because he's lying. He knows we know he's lying and yet he knows that the intelligent people who know he's lying aren't numerous enough to counter the welfare cheats, the government bureaucrats and the other grifters who are sure to put him over the top.

Savage is right, of course, that there are far more poor people than rich people in America and if the spending cuts push them over the edge and they actually start to vote in their own interests, then his worst nightmare will come to pass: President Obama will get a second term and his taxes will go up.